Black v. . Caffe
New York Court of Appeals
Writ of Error to the Supreme Court, sitting in the first district, where a judgment of the Superior Court of the city of New York had been affirmed. This was an action of assumpsit against Michel Caffe, as acceptor of three bills of exchange, drawn upon him by F. Yatin, Jr. & Co., of St. Quentin, in France.
Read the full summary
Writ of Error to the Supreme Court, sitting in the first district, where a judgment of the Superior Court of the city of New York had been affirmed. This was an action of assumpsit against Michel Caffe, as acceptor of three bills of exchange, drawn upon him by F. Yatin, Jr. & Co., of St. Quentin, in France. The plaintiff was the indorsee of the bills. *The plaintiff commenced suit, by the filing -* and service of a declaration containing the common money counts, on which was indorsed a copy of the bills in question, with a notice “ that the following were copies of the bills of exchange upon…
1Concurrence
Was of opinion that the bill might be given in evidence under the money counts without the aid of the statutes on this subject, upon the authority of Henschel v. Mahler, 3 Denio, 428, 430 and of Hays v. Phelps, 1 Sandf. S.C. Rep. 67, and the authorities cited in these cases
GARDINER, JEWETT, WELLES and WATSON, concurred in the conclusion that the judgment should be affirmed.
GRIDLEY, J., was absent.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Henschel v. MahlerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1846